new xemacs segfault, can anyone reproduce this?

View: New views
1 Messages — Rating Filter:   Alert me  

new xemacs segfault, can anyone reproduce this?

by Anthony Mallet :: Rate this Message:

Reply to Author | View Threaded | Show Only this Message

Hi,

Since about 2-3 monthes, my xemacs is segfaulting from times to times
under -current SMP. Should I say this never (ever) happened before and I
did not change xemacs version, etc. (although everything has been
recompiled with current userland).

Today I finally isolated some reproducible behaviour, which disapear when
I put all but one CPU offline (thus my posting in this list).
I would like to know if some of you can also reproduce this problem (you
need to 'make extract' in pkgsrc/editor/xemacs):

ficus[~]# uname -a
NetBSD ficus 4.99.49 NetBSD 4.99.49 (FICUS) #96: Sun Jan 13 17:58:31 CET 2008  troot@ficus:/usr/obj/sys/arch/i386/compile/FICUS i386

ficus[~]# cpuctl list
ID   Unbound LWPs Interrupts     Last change
---- ------------ -------------- ----------------------------
0    online       intr           Sun Jan 13 19:50:51 2008
3    online       intr           Sun Jan 13 21:01:23 2008
2    online       intr           Sun Jan 13 21:01:24 2008
1    online       intr           Sun Jan 13 21:01:25 2008

And as a regular user with X display:
ficus[~] > xemacs -vanilla -eval '(setq progress-feedback-use-echo-area t)' -eval '(font-lock-mode)' /usr/pkgsrc/editors/xemacs/work/xemacs-21.4.17/src/extents.c

xemacs should segfault 9 times out of 10, and at least exhibit wrong
keyword decoration.

With 3 CPU offline the problem disapears:
ficus[~]# cpuctl list
ID   Unbound LWPs Interrupts     Last change
---- ------------ -------------- ----------------------------
0    online       intr           Sun Jan 13 19:50:51 2008
3    offline      intr           Sun Jan 13 21:11:42 2008
2    offline      intr           Sun Jan 13 21:11:43 2008
1    offline      intr           Sun Jan 13 21:11:44 2008

Since xemacs is single-threaded and this used to work fine, I would not
blame xemacs too fast. And I also tested with xemacs-21.4.21 and
xemacs-21.5.27, same thing ...

Do you think this can be a problem in the current kernel?

--
Cheers,
Anthony